时间距离和自我解释对调节焦点的影响

调节焦点理论提出,自我调节过程中存在着提升焦点和预防焦点这两种不同的目标追求策略。基于以往研究,本研究提出,自我解释和时间距离会交互影响着人们的调节焦点。研究结果发现,自我解释能够显著地预测调节焦点;独立自我解释更可能激活个体的提升焦点倾向,而依赖自我解释更可能激活个体的预防焦点倾向。此外,近期时间距离启动条件下,独立和依赖自我解释使得个体的调节焦点的差异倾向性更为明显,但是对远期时间距离的知觉则使得依赖自我解释的个体更加偏离预防焦点倾向,趋向于提升性焦点,并与独立自我解释差异不大。     

调节焦点视角员工追随选择分化:前因与后果的影响机制

追随行为是组织员工以组织目标为导向,能动地与领导力和组织情境交互作用的多态行为。经对国内外学界相关研究现状的梳理分析,目前对这类多形态员工行为的研究还很薄弱。为此,从调节焦点理论视角,展开员工追随选择分化的前因及对后果差异影响机制的研究,首先是基于两种不同调节焦点的员工追随行为的内涵结构与测量研究;然后,揭示影响员工追随选择分化的三层面前因机制,即领导特征对员工追随选择分化的影响及领导-成员交换关系在其中的调节作用,组织特征对员工追随选择分化的影响及员工组织公平感知在其中的调节作用,个体特征对员工追随选择分化的影响及领导反馈在其中的调节作用;最后检验员工不同调节焦点追随行为对工作绩效的差异作用效应。以期推动追随理论更加契合组织实务。     

调节模式对选择超载的影响及其机制：一个有中介的调节模型

当前,选择超载领域研究的焦点已从验证其是否存在,转向至其何时存在,即边界条件的探讨。本研究基于调节模式理论,分别以决策后悔和延迟选择作为选择超载的指标,开展两个实验探查选择超载存在的调节模式条件及所涉及的内在机制。实验1以决策后悔作指标,运用量表测试法操纵调节模式,初步探讨调节模式对选择超载的影响,结果发现调节模式调节了选项集与决策后悔的关系,即对评估模式的个体来说,面对大选项集比小选项集时体验到更强的后悔情绪,出现了选择超载,而对运动模式的个体而言,两种条件下的决策后悔无显著差异;实验2以延迟选择作指标,通过任务启动法操纵调节模式,进一步探讨调节模式对选择超载的影响及其机制,结果发现调节模式调节了选项集与延迟选择的关系,即对评估模式的个体来说,面对大选项集比小选项集时更倾向于延迟选择,出现了选择超载,而对运动模式的个体而言,两种条件下的延迟选择偏好无显著差异,进一步有中介的调节模型分析表明选择难度可以部分解释这种效应。总之,通过采用不同方法操纵调节模式,选取不同的选择超载指标,数据结果都一致支持：评估模式的个体比运动模式的个体更容易出现选择超载,选择难度在其中发挥着一定的中介作用。     

运动行为领域中的调节匹配

调节匹配理论认为个体更倾向于采用与自身调节定向方式相匹配的行为策略, 并且当个体处于调节匹配状态时, 其行为表现会更好。通过梳理近年来运动领域关于调节匹配的研究发现, 调节匹配可以对运动行为的多个方面产生影响, 如促进运动员的运动表现、提高运动员的决策效能、增强体育锻炼参与度等。未来研究应注重对运动中调节匹配研究内容的扩充, 探讨调节匹配的内在机制, 并完善调节匹配的研究方法。     

情绪的确定性评价对信息加工的影响

检验了情绪的效价和确定性评价对个体的信息加工策略选择的影响及其心理机制。结果表明,情绪效价对个体的信息加工方式的影响会受到情绪确定性评价的调节。高确定评价的情绪中,积极情绪的被试更倾向于采用启发式加工,消极情绪的被试更倾向于采用系统式加工。积极情绪中,高确定评价情绪的被试更倾向于采用启发式加工,低确定评价情绪的被试更倾向于采用系统式加工。当个体对自己产生情绪的原因进行合理归因后,情绪效价和确定性评价对个体信息加工方式的影响效应都消失了,说明情绪的效价和确定性评价均以信息的方式对对个体信息加工策略的选择产生影响。     

调节焦点理论:组织管理中的应用

根据调节焦点理论,人们在实现目标的过程中存在两种调节焦点:促进焦点驱动人们关注理想,防御焦点驱动人们避免失误。虽然调节焦点理论源自社会心理学,但近年来却越来越多地被用于解释组织现象,对管理研究产生了重要影响。在回顾调节焦点内涵的基础上,归纳了常见的操作化方法,梳理了调节焦点理论在组织管理研究中的应用,并提出未来研究的发展方向。     

无意识目标对道德取向的调节作用

已有研究表明目标可以在无意识的条件下被激活并自动地引导行为以达成目标,但该过程是否通过调节心理准备状态实现尚不清楚。本研究考察了无意识目标对个体道德取向的影响。实验1通过语义启动方式激活被试的成就目标,结果发现,与未激活任何目标的被试相比,激活了无意识成就目标的被试更偏向功利主义道德取向。实验2激活被试母亲的概念,结果发现这部分被试比对照组更偏向道义主义道德取向。上述结果表明,自动激活的目标可以影响个体的道德取向,使个体面对道德情境时能做出更合适的行为以达成目标。     

未来情景思考对目标达成的双刃作用及其机制

未来情景思考指个体想象并预先感受某个可能在未来发生的自我相关情景事件的心理加工,它对目标达成可产生双刃影响:一些思考方式会妨碍目标达成,如想象理想的结果或过程;而另一些思考方式则会促进目标达成,如过程模拟和想象较为消极的目标相关场景。对于未来情景思考是促进还是妨碍目标达成,动机水平的高低和执行意向的清晰程度可能是关键调节因素,相应的干预策略可通过增强这两者而将未来情景思考对目标达成的妨碍作用转化为促进作用。进一步的研究需系统探讨不同方式的未来情景思考影响目标达成的认知神经机制,并对目标特征和人格特点如何调节未来情景思考对目标达成的影响进行探讨。     

决策的加工过程及个体差异:模糊痕迹理论视角

模糊痕迹理论是行为决策领域的重要解释理论,它认为个体在加工信息时存在字面加工和要义加工两种方式,在决策时个体更倾向于使用要义加工,而且这两种加工存在个体差异。决策的加工模型依据模糊痕迹理论提出,以框架效应和风险知觉为例对该模型进行解释。模糊痕迹理论通过分析加工方式的个体差异来解释决策的个体差异。未来研究应进一步比较模糊痕迹理论与其他理论,完善根据模糊痕迹理论提出的决策加工模型,并深入探索决策的个体差异。     

执行意向对目标达成的促进及其作用过程

执行意向,也被称为“如果—那么”计划,是指将一个预期的情境与一个确定的目标定向行为联系起来,明确说明了个体在什么时间、地点以及如何追求一个特定目标的计划.大量的实验室和现场实验研究发现,执行意向能有效促进目标的达成.执行意向中“如果”成分使得预期情境线索的心理表征高度激活;而“那么”成分使得计划中的反应得以自动实施.这两个假设的认知过程已被证实,并且在执行意向影响目标达成过程中起到中介作用.在未来的研究中除了将其与动机理论进行整合以及更深入地去探讨其心理机制之外,还要积极进行本土化的实证研究.     

小学生调节聚焦对生活满意度的影响:压力应对方式的中介作用

采用调节聚焦问卷、压力应对方式问卷和生活满意度问卷对北京市五所学校1174名小学生进行调查, 考察调节聚焦对小学生压力应对方式、生活满意度的影响, 并检验应对方式在调节聚焦和生活满意度之间的中介作用。结果发现:(1)促进定向对小学生生活满意度有显著正向预测作用, 预防定向对生活满意度有显著负向预测作用;(2)积极应对和促进定向更相关, 消极应对和预防定向更相关;(3)积极应对在促进定向和生活满意度之间起着完全中介的作用, 积极应对、消极应对均在预防定向和生活满意度之间起着部分中介的作用。     

期望与绩效的关系:调节定向的调节作用

经典动机理论认为高期望能提高绩效水平,本研究结合调节定向理论进一步回答这种效应"何时"存在或"如何"产生的问题。研究1通过测量期望水平、并用任务框架操作调节定向,检验了情景启动的调节定向对期望与行为间关系的影响;研究2采取更严格的被试内设计通过任务难度操作期望,考察了作为个体长期差异的调节定向的作用。结果表明:①调节定向调节成功期望与绩效之间的关系:对于促进定向,成功期望与绩效正相关;对于预防定向,期望与绩效相关不显著。②动机可以部分解释调节定向与期望的交互作用机制:高水平的成功期望会提高促进定向个体的动机强度,进而产生高的绩效结果;其对预防定向个体的动机强度的影响不显著。     

青少年调节聚焦对心理复原力的影响：元情绪和应对方式的链式中介

研究旨在考察应对方式、元情绪在不同类型调节聚焦与心理复原力关系中的中介效应。使用简易应对方式量表、调节聚焦量表、特质性元情绪量表和心理复原力量表对随机抽取的安徽省四所初高中899名青少年进行调查。结果发现：（1）调节聚焦、应对方式和元情绪能显著预测心理复原力。（2）促进聚焦不仅能够直接正向预测心理复原力,还能够通过元情绪、积极应对以及消极应对间接预测心理复原力。（3）防御聚焦能够通过消极应对、元情绪以及积极应对间接预测心理复原力。本研究结果显示,元情绪与应对方式能够解释青少年调节聚焦与心理复原力关系的内在机制。     

Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus prevention pride

A new task goal elicits a feeling of pride in individuals with a subjective history of success, and this achievment pride produces anticipatory goal reactions that energize and direct behavior to approach the task goal. By distinguishing between promotion pride and prevention pride, the present paper extends this classic model of achievement motivation. Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997 ) distinguishes between a promotion focus on hopes and accomplishments (gains) and a prevention focus on safety and responsibilities (non‐losses). We propose that a subjective history of success with promotion‐related eagerness (promotion pride) orients individuals toward using eagerness means to approach a new task goal, whereas a subjective history of success with prevention‐related vigilance (prevention pride) orients individuals toward using vigilance means to approach a new task goal. Studies 1–3 tested this proposal by examining the relations between a new measure of participants' subjective histories of promotion success and prevention success (the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ)) and their achievement strategies in different tasks. Study 4 examined the relation between participants' RFQ responses and their reported frequency of feeling eager or vigilant in past task engagements. Study 5 used an experimental priming technique to make participants temporarily experience either a subjective history of promotion success or a subjective history of prevention success. For both chronic and situationally induced achievement pride, these studies found that when approaching task goals individuals with promotion pride use eagerness means whereas individuals with prevention pride use vigilance means. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A regulatory focus model of self-evaluation

Regulatory focus theory [Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 1-46). New York: Academic Press.] argues that concerns with growth and nurturance (i.e., a promotion focus) and concerns with safety and security (i.e., a prevention focus) produce different motives and perception. The current studies test whether regulatory focus also affects individuals’ strivings for self-evaluation. Specifically, we argue that a promotion or a prevention focus directs the self-evaluation process to self-esteem or self-certainty, respectively. Two studies supported this prediction by demonstrating that regulatory focus affects the strength of self-evaluation goals and individuals’ reactions to goal failure. In Study 1, we found that a promotion focus led to a stronger self-esteem goal (as measured by greater accessibility of esteem-related words), whereas a prevention focus led to a stronger self-certainty goal (as measured by greater accessibility of certainty-related words). In Study 2, a promotion failure led to lower self-esteem than a prevention failure, but a prevention failure led to lower self-certainty than a promotion failure. This research suggests an unrecognized role of nurturance and safety concerns in understanding the self-evaluation process.     

A meta-analysis of the regulatory focus nomological network: Work-related antecedents and consequences

Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997, 1998) has received a great deal of recent attention in the organizational behavior literature. Despite the amount of new evidence surrounding regulatory focus and its relationships with other variables, a quantitative summary of this literature is lacking. The authors used meta-analysis to summarize correlations from 77 empirical studies that included self-report measures of promotion and prevention focus. Meta-analytic effect sizes between promotion and prevention focus and work-related variables are reported. In general, results indicated that promotion and prevention focus are orthogonal constructs and each construct is uniquely related to other theoretically relevant constructs. The results also demonstrate the importance of regulatory foci to organizational researchers as well as the need for a unified approach to their measurement.     

Regulatory Focus and Political Decision Making: When People Favor Reform Over the Status Quo

Two studies examined the impact of self‐reported use of promotion‐related (i.e., eagerness) and prevention‐related (i.e., vigilance) strategies when making “risky” or “conservative” decisions about economic reform under good, average, or poor economic conditions. Consistent with regulatory focus theory ( Higgins, 1997, 1998, 2000 ), in both studies strategic vigilance was associated with making a conservative choice, whereas strategic eagerness was associated with making a risky choice. In addition, along with perceptions of economic conditions, chronic strength of prevention focus (Study 1) or situationally induced prevention focus (Study 2) was associated with using strategic vigilance, whereas chronic strength of promotion focus (Study 1) or situationally induced promotion focus (Study 2) was associated with using strategic eagerness. Finally, regulatory focus and economic perceptions indirectly predicted economic reform decisions through their impact on strategy use. Our studies are the first to demonstrate that vigilant or eager strategy use is associated with “conservative” or “risky” political decisions.     

The Motivational Function of Regulatory Focus in Creativity

The Regulatory Focus Theory maintains that people may focus on achieving positive outcomes (have a promotion focus) or avoiding negative ones (have a prevention focus) when they pursue their goals. Under a promotion focus, people would formulate as many strategies as possible to attain their goal, and hence be fluent in idea generation when they perform a creative task. In contrast, people under a prevention focus would seek to avoid the negative consequences of failing to attain a valued goal, and persist even when the likelihood of success in a creativity situation is small. We tested these predictions in a study, where regulatory focus was measured as an individual differences variable (Part 1) and induced by a goal framing manipulation (Part 2). The results supported our predictions, and suggested that creative accomplishment requires flexible alternation of regulatory foci at the different stages of creative undertakings.     

个体及同伴调节聚焦对目标追求的影响

探讨个体与同伴的调节聚焦对目标追求的影响及感知相似性在其中的作用。回归分析显示,个体促进聚焦×同伴促进聚焦交互项显著预测同伴作用评价、求助意愿及动机水平,简单斜率分析表明,同伴为高促进聚焦时个体促进聚焦的积极效应更明显。中介分析表明,感知相似性是个体促进聚焦×同伴促进聚焦交互项与同伴作用评价、求助意愿之间关系的中介变量。总的来说,同伴调节聚焦能调节个体调节聚焦与目标追求的关系,且这一作用部分受到感知相似性的中介。     

Regulatory fit at work: gravitational effects and associations with employee well-being

ABSTRACT

Using a task approach, this study examined the extent to which employee regulatory focus would “gravitate” employees towards promotion- versus prevention-oriented tasks within their jobs, and whether a subsequent regulatory fit/misfit would be associated with their well-being (i.e., mental health and job satisfaction). In a pre-study among 37 employees, we determined the regulatory focus of work tasks from the Netherlands Skill Survey, which are relevant to the general working population, resulting in a selection of 7 promotion and 11 prevention tasks. For our main study, we used the Dutch Longitudinal Internet Studies for the Social Sciences (LISS) panel and collected data from 1,606 respondents. In 2011, we collected respondents’ regulatory focus and in 2012, we collected their work tasks and well-being. Promotion-oriented employees considered both promotion and prevention tasks to be highly relevant in their jobs, and this relevance was associated with their mental health. Prevention-oriented employees, however, did not respond to the relevance of promotion or prevention tasks and generally reported lower well-being, irrespective of the regulatory focus of their tasks. We tentatively conclude that promotion focus gravitates employees towards job with a richer task content, containing both promotion and prevention tasks.